> I've always found it a bit ironic when people intending to advocate for better treatment of the homeless proclaim that homeless shelters are havens of violence, full of dangerous people with drug and mental health problems.
Homeless shelters typically lack privacy and security from other residents (something most, even high density, regular housing does not lack for very good reasons). So, even if dangerous people were no more common in the homeless population than the general population, the small number of them would drive others out of shelters, and they'd become super concentrated there.
And advocates for better treatment of the homeless tend to acknowledge the greater incidence of serious drug and mental health problems in the population as something services need to address.
Homeless shelters typically lack privacy and security from other residents (something most, even high density, regular housing does not lack for very good reasons). So, even if dangerous people were no more common in the homeless population than the general population, the small number of them would drive others out of shelters, and they'd become super concentrated there.
And advocates for better treatment of the homeless tend to acknowledge the greater incidence of serious drug and mental health problems in the population as something services need to address.
So, where is the irony?